Worthy of survival

Human
Wayne Throop wrote:
: "columbiaaccidentinvestigation"
: Interesting you might try again, without evasion,

What am I supposed to have evaded?
What am I supposed to try again?
You really haven't said.

: but you chunked one citation previously in this debate do you want to
: chunk another just to attempt to prove me wrong?

What, prove that 1g acceleration is 1g acceleration? Gosh, I guess I
really need powerful citations to convince a wily feller like yourself.
For my next "evasion", I'll prove that two plus three equals five, and I
won't cite a thing.

And what is "chunking" a citation, and which citation am I supposed
to have done it to? You don't supply any new citations that I
haven't already explained to you, so this is not at all clear.

: So please correlate the two citations below *10 & *11, with you're many
: rebuttals to my posts,

My are many rebuttals?

: "Since the g-level and rate of rotation determine colony dimensions to
: a large extent (and thus weight) determination of an acceptable rate
: of rotation is important."

Just did that one. What do *you* think it means? Seems pretty clear;
they're looking for an acceptable less-than-1g environment, but we've
been talking about a 1g environment. So what about this do you not
understand? What about this do you think proves that 1g isn't 1g, since
they are talking about less than 1g, and more than 1rpm rates?

: Artificial gravity is a potentially useful tool," notes Cohen, "but
: it's not a universal panacea."

Just did this one, too. That's right, it isn't a universal panacea.
It's just a panacea for symptoms caused by microgravity, since with
so-called-artificial gravity, there is no microgravity at all, not even
hypogravity. Again, what about this do you not understand? What about
this do you think proves that 1g isn't 1g, since they are talking about
3g and WAY more than 1rpm.

You'll have to be a bit more specific about what you're having
problems understanding. Just re-quoting the citations whole doesn't
give any clue as to where you're going wrong, so that your misunderstanding
can be "correlated", ie, explained to you.

Here, I'll review it again for you. You seem to like repetition.
Your citation # 10 is talking about how much *less* than 1g can be
effective; they already know 1g will be effective. Your citation # 11
is talking about *more* than 1g, and very high spin rates, and so
is irrelevant.

If you still don't understand, then BE SPECIFIC in asking for clarification.
Which part of "less than 1g" and "high spin rates" don't you understand?


Wayne Throop http://sheol.org/throopw



*11 http://exploration.nasa.gov/articles...nggravity.html
"February 7, 2003 : Want to know what 3-g feels like?
The Pull of Hypergravity "...
His goal? To learn how humans adjust to changes in
gravity--particularly strong gravity.
NASA is interested because it's not just microgravity that astronauts
experience in space. They're exposed to hypergravity, too: up to 3.2-g
at launch, and about 1.4-g on reentry... Witness the way astronauts can
be disoriented when they first arrive in space, but soon learn to
function in a weightless environment. If humans are spun for long
enough, says Cohen, the strange effects of rotation might become
familiar'

As you can see dr cohens investigations "above" are if a negative
effect of a 1g spun capsule is if human adaptation will occur to any
change in environment ie, if the "strange effects" might become
familiar to the space travelers and not allow them to return to a
normal life on earth.
This question is much more important than your or anybody elses ego in
making safe and effective countermeasures for space travelers, and the
question of human vestibular functions being effected by this
environment applies to large structures as well as can be seen in *10
(below), a study of space colonies.
So do not attempt to "self stimulating your intellectual insecurities
by attempting to boost up you're own ego at the expense of others"
as it is just a reflection of you're insecurities, so please try to
pay more respect to the science of bioastronautics, as you think
you're posts discredit me, but they actually hold no water without
citations.


*10
Space Settlements: A Design Study
Nasa SP-413 NASA 1977 page 179 col1 par 3
"8. Recommendations and Conclusions..
2. Maximum Acceptable Rate G Levels. The Physiological effects of
zero-g are serious for long duration-exposure in space. For this
reason and since little is known about the exposure at intermediate
g-levels, 1g was chosen as the design standard. The 1-g choice has
significant influence on the design and may be unnecessarily high. An
examination of physiology under partial g is required in spaelab, and
subsequent space station missions to determine the minimum g value, for
which there are no serious long-term physiological effects upon humans.
3. Maximum Acceptable rate of habitation rotation. The rate of
rotation required to achieved the desired pseudo gravity has
substantial impact on the design. Since the g-level and rate of
rotation determine colony dimensions to a large extent (and thus
weight) determination of an acceptable rate of rotation is important.
While it is difficult to test human vestibular functions in a realistic
way on earth it is critical that a better understanding of the subject
be obtained by both studies on earth and in space.


Tom
"Maintaining optimal alertness and neurobehavioral functioning during
space operations is critical to enable the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration's (NASA's) vision and quota extend humanity's
reach to the Moon, Mars and beyond and quota to become a reality."
(Mallis, M. M.; DeRoshia, C. W)

wayne stated:"And what is "chunking" a citation, and which citation am
I supposed
to have done it to?"

Oh yeah notice the difference between waynes message and the actual
source (that's chunking to the point either you made an honest
mistake, or you were self stimulating your intellectual insecurities by
attempting to boost up you're own ego at the expense of others"),
as you made the readers of that post search for the acutal source to
verfiy and validate youre words, but I found it for you and posted it
correctly so other readers could distinguish you're words from those
of real credible scientists.

Wanye posted:"Serious cardiac dysrhythmias may occur due to prolonged
exposure to hypogravity or asymptomatic cardiac disease. And Diminished
cardiac function, orthostatic or postural hypotension, and the impaired
ability to perform strenuous tasks on a planetary surface may occur
due to prolonged exposure to hypogravity."

And the actual source *12 says the following:


*12
http://bioastroroadmap.nasa.gov/User...jsp?showData=6
"Risk 6: Diminished Cardiac and Vascular Function
Crosscutting Area : Human Health and Countermeasures, Discipline :
Cardiovascular Alterations, Description : Diminished cardiac function,
orthostatic or postural hypotension, and the impaired ability to
perform strenuous tasks on a planetary surface may occur due to
prolonged exposure to hypogravity.
Context / Risk Factors : This risk may be influenced by altered neural
and hormonal regulation, flight duration, or gender.
Justification / Rationale : Some, but not all, studies suggest that
prolonged exposure to microgravity may lead to reduction of cardiac
mass and reduced cardiac function. Carefully controlled inflight
studies are required to document this finding and determine the
clinical signficance.
Important reference

Blomqvist LD, Lane CG, Wright SJ, Meny GM, Levine BD, Buckey JC,
Peshock RM, Weatherall P, Stray-Gundersen J, Gaffney FA, Watenpaugh DE,
Arbeille P, and Baisch F. Cardiovascular regulation in microgravity.
In: Scientific Results of the German Spacelab Mission D-2: Proceedings
of the Norderney Symposium, edited by Sahm PR, Keller MH, and Schiewe
B.. Koln, Germany: Wissenschaftliche Projektfuhrung D-2 (c/o Deutsches
Zentrum fur Luft- und Raumfahrt), 1994, p. 688-690.

Charles JB, Frey MA, Fritsch-Yelle JM, Fortner GW. Cardiovascular and
Cardiorespiratory Function. In Huntoon C, Antipov V, Grigoriev A
(editors), Volume III, Book I (humans in Space) Space Biology and
Medicine, AIAA, Reston, VA, 1996.

The Neurolab Spacelab Mission: Neuroscience Research in Space: Results
from the STS-90 Neurolab Spacelab Mission: Section 4 Blood Pressure
Control. pp. 171-205. Buckey J and Homick J (editors). NASA
SP-2003-535, 2003.

Diminished Cardiac and Vascular Function
Crosscutting Area : Human Health and Countermeasures
Discipline : Cardiovascular Alterations
Risk Number : 6
Risk Description : Diminished cardiac function, orthostatic or postural
hypotension, and the impaired ability to perform strenuous tasks on a
planetary surface may occur due to prolonged exposure to hypogravity.
Context / Risk Factors : This risk may be influenced by altered neural
and hormonal regulation, flight duration, or gender.
Justification / Rationale : Some, but not all, studies suggest that
prolonged exposure to microgravity may lead to reduction of cardiac
mass and reduced cardiac function. Carefully controlled inflight
studies are required to document this finding and determine the
clinical signficance.
Risk Rating :
ISS : Priority 2
Lunar : Priority 2
Mars : Priority 2
Current Countermeasures : In flight exercise
Projected Countermeasures or Mitigations and Other Deliverables :
Artificial G exposure, Drugs that affect cardiac mass and function,
Improved exercise and conditioning program"


http://www.nsbri.org/Research/Neuro.html
Research Summary
Astronauts experiencing weightlessness often suffer from
disorientation, motion sickness and a loss of sense of direction
because their bodies try to adapt to the conditions of microgravity.
Back on Earth, they must readjust to gravity and can experience
problems standing up, stabilizing their gaze, walking and turning.
Importantly, sensorimotor disturbances after gravity transitions are
more profound as microgravity exposure duration increases. Such
changes can impact operational activities including approach and
landing, docking, remote manipulation, extra-vehicular activity and
post-landing normal and emergency egress, and thus compromise crew
safety and mission success. The Sensorimotor Adaptation Team is
developing preflight and inflight training countermeasures so that
astronauts can adjust more rapidly to weightlessness, to other
gravitational environments and upon return to Earth. Studies will
provide basic knowledge relating to balance disorders affecting more
than 90 million Americans.
Team Leader:
Charles M. Oman, Ph.D.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Harvard-MIT Division of Health Sciences and Technology"


Tom
"Maintaining optimal alertness and neurobehavioral functioning during
space operations is critical to enable the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration's (NASA's) vision and quota extend humanity's
reach to the Moon, Mars and beyond and quota to become a reality."
(Mallis, M. M.; DeRoshia, C. W)

Wayne Throop wrote:
: "columbiaaccidentinvestigation"
: Interesting you might try again, without evasion,

What am I supposed to have evaded?
What am I supposed to try again?
You really haven't said.

: but you chunked one citation previously in this debate do you want to
: chunk another just to attempt to prove me wrong?

What, prove that 1g acceleration is 1g acceleration? Gosh, I guess I
really need powerful citations to convince a wily feller like yourself.
For my next "evasion", I'll prove that two plus three equals five, and I
won't cite a thing.

And what is "chunking" a citation, and which citation am I supposed
to have done it to? You don't supply any new citations that I
haven't already explained to you, so this is not at all clear.

: So please correlate the two citations below *10 & *11, with you're many
: rebuttals to my posts,

My are many rebuttals?

: "Since the g-level and rate of rotation determine colony dimensions to
: a large extent (and thus weight) determination of an acceptable rate
: of rotation is important."

Just did that one. What do *you* think it means? Seems pretty clear;
they're looking for an acceptable less-than-1g environment, but we've
been talking about a 1g environment. So what about this do you not
understand? What about this do you think proves that 1g isn't 1g, since
they are talking about less than 1g, and more than 1rpm rates?

: Artificial gravity is a potentially useful tool," notes Cohen, "but
: it's not a universal panacea."

Just did this one, too. That's right, it isn't a universal panacea.
It's just a panacea for symptoms caused by microgravity, since with
so-called-artificial gravity, there is no microgravity at all, not even
hypogravity. Again, what about this do you not understand? What about
this do you think proves that 1g isn't 1g, since they are talking about
3g and WAY more than 1rpm.

You'll have to be a bit more specific about what you're having
problems understanding. Just re-quoting the citations whole doesn't
give any clue as to where you're going wrong, so that your misunderstanding
can be "correlated", ie, explained to you.

Here, I'll review it again for you. You seem to like repetition.
Your citation # 10 is talking about how much *less* than 1g can be
effective; they already know 1g will be effective. Your citation # 11
is talking about *more* than 1g, and very high spin rates, and so
is irrelevant.

If you still don't understand, then BE SPECIFIC in asking for clarification.
Which part of "less than 1g" and "high spin rates" don't you understand?


Wayne Throop http://sheol.org/throopw

rand stated well (he should have said my dog ate it but you know rand
and his ego..)" Hallelujiah! Not that he makes any more sense, but at
least he managed to bottom post."

*11 http://exploration.nasa.gov/articles...nggravity.html
"February 7, 2003 : Want to know what 3-g feels like?
The Pull of Hypergravity "...
His goal? To learn how humans adjust to changes in
gravity--particularly strong gravity.
NASA is interested because it's not just microgravity that astronauts
experience in space. They're exposed to hypergravity, too: up to 3.2-g
at launch, and about 1.4-g on reentry... Witness the way astronauts can
be disoriented when they first arrive in space, but soon learn to
function in a weightless environment. If humans are spun for long
enough, says Cohen, the strange effects of rotation might become
familiar'

As you can see dr cohens investigations "above" are if a negative
effect of a 1g spun capsule is if human adaptation will occur to any
change in environment ie, if the "strange effects" might become
familiar to the space travelers and not allow them to return to a
normal life on earth.
This question is much more important than your or anybody elses ego in
making safe and effective countermeasures for space travelers, and the
question of human vestibular functions being effected by this
environment applies to large structures as well as can be seen in *10
(below), a study of space colonies.
So do not attempt to "self stimulating your intellectual insecurities
by attempting to boost up you're own ego at the expense of others"
as it is just a reflection of you're insecurities, so please try to
pay more respect to the science of bioastronautics, as you think
you're posts discredit me, but they actually hold no water without
citations.


*10
Space Settlements: A Design Study
Nasa SP-413 NASA 1977 page 179 col1 par 3
"8. Recommendations and Conclusions..
2. Maximum Acceptable Rate G Levels. The Physiological effects of
zero-g are serious for long duration-exposure in space. For this
reason and since little is known about the exposure at intermediate
g-levels, 1g was chosen as the design standard. The 1-g choice has
significant influence on the design and may be unnecessarily high. An
examination of physiology under partial g is required in spaelab, and
subsequent space station missions to determine the minimum g value, for
which there are no serious long-term physiological effects upon humans.
3. Maximum Acceptable rate of habitation rotation. The rate of
rotation required to achieved the desired pseudo gravity has
substantial impact on the design. Since the g-level and rate of
rotation determine colony dimensions to a large extent (and thus
weight) determination of an acceptable rate of rotation is important.
While it is difficult to test human vestibular functions in a realistic
way on earth it is critical that a better understanding of the subject
be obtained by both studies on earth and in space.


Tom
"Maintaining optimal alertness and neurobehavioral functioning during
space operations is critical to enable the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration's (NASA's) vision and quota extend humanity's
reach to the Moon, Mars and beyond and quota to become a reality."
(Mallis, M. M.; DeRoshia, C. W)

Rand Simberg wrote:
On 30 Oct 2006 14:42:11 -0800, in a place far, far away,
"columbiaaccidentinvestigation"
made the phosphor on my
monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that:


Here, I'll review it again for you. You seem to like repetition.
Your citation # 10 is talking about how much *less* than 1g can be
effective; they already know 1g will be effective. Your citation # 11
is talking about *more* than 1g, and very high spin rates, and so
is irrelevant.

If you still don't understand, then BE SPECIFIC in asking for clarification.
Which part of "less than 1g" and "high spin rates" don't you understand?


Wayne Throop http://sheol.org/throopw



*11 http://exploration.nasa.gov/articles...nggravity.html
"February 7, 2003 : Want to know what 3-g feels like?
The Pull of Hypergravity "...
His goal? To learn how humans adjust to changes in
gravity--particularly strong gravity.
NASA is interested because it's not just microgravity that astronauts
experience in space. They're exposed to hypergravity, too: up to 3.2-g
at launch, and about 1.4-g on reentry... Witness the way astronauts can
be disoriented when they first arrive in space, but soon learn to
function in a weightless environment. If humans are spun for long
enough, says Cohen, the strange effects of rotation might become
familiar'

As you can see dr cohens investigations "above" are if a negative
effect of a 1g spun capsule is if human adaptation will occur to any
change in environment ie, if the "strange effects" might become
familiar to the space travelers and not allow them to return to a
normal life on earth.
This question is much more important than your or anybody elses ego in
making safe and effective countermeasures for space travelers, and the
question of human vestibular functions being effected by this
environment applies to large structures as well as can be seen in *10
(below), a study of space colonies.
So do not attempt to "self stimulating your intellectual insecurities
by attempting to boost up you're own ego at the expense of others"
as it is just a reflection of you're insecurities, so please try to
pay more respect to the science of bioastronautics, as you think
you're posts discredit me, but they actually hold no water without
citations.

: "columbiaaccidentinvestigation"
: As you can see dr cohens investigations "above" are if a negative
: effect of a 1g spun capsule is if human adaptation will occur to any
: change in environment ie, if the "strange effects" might become
: familiar to the space travelers and not allow them to return to a
: normal life on earth.

Exposure to small-radius spin and high accelerations.
None of which are relevant to the scenario at hand.

: This question is much more important than your or anybody elses ego in
: making safe and effective countermeasures for space travelers,

I never said it wasn't important, I said it was irrelevant to the
scenario at hand, and indeed it *is* irrelevant to the scenario at hand.
It is relevant to lots of *other* scenarios, just not the one at hand.

Similarly your cite #10; it's interesting and important research. Just
not relevant to the scenario at hand. Relevant to other scenarios. Not
the one at hand.

To remind you of the scenario at hand, it is long-duration continuous
exposure to 1g centriptal acceleration at less than 1rpm. There is no
reason to suspect there would be circulatory system problems at all,
and every reason, and lots of evidence, that there would not be.
Which your cite #10 mentions indirectly, since they are studying
less-than-1g and raster-than-1rpm as a cost-cutting measure,
and they explicitly state that's what they are doing.

I really don't know how I could have been more clear about this,
or how you came to the strange conclusion that I didn't think this
research was important.


Wayne Throop http://sheol.org/throopw

: ""
: Oh yeah notice the difference between waynes message and the actual source

Or better, notice that columbiaaccidentinvestigation is altering the
quotation, so it isn't actually my message. See below for details.

: (That's chunking

It is? Never heard the term used that way.
Is this a meaning of your own invention? Or is there some
community in which it is current usage?

: Wanye posted:"Serious cardiac dysrhythmias may occur due to prolonged
: exposure to hypogravity or asymptomatic cardiac disease. And
: Diminished cardiac function, orthostatic or postural hypotension, and
: the impaired ability to perform strenuous tasks on a planetary surface
: may occur due to prolonged exposure to hypogravity."
:
: And the actual source *12 says the following:

Since I wasn't refering to only "source *12", but to two sources, the
relevance of there being an addition from another source difference is
not apparent to any thinking person (though I suppose it may be apparent
to columbiaaccidentinvestigation). Perhaps columbiaaccidentinvestigation
would like to "correlate" his quote of my quote, and discuss why he
removed all the whitespace that made it clear I was quoting two sources.

Here is what I actually said, with the whitespace and
relevant context left intact

: http://bioastroroadmap.nasa.gov/index.jsp

[...] Selecting for interplanetary trips and
cardiovascular problems we find two papers, with these descriptions:

Serious cardiac dysrhythmias may occur due to prolonged exposure to
hypogravity or asymptomatic cardiac disease.

and

Diminished cardiac function, orthostatic or postural hypotension,
and the impaired ability to perform strenuous tasks on a planetary
surface may occur due to prolonged exposure to hypogravity.

Two descriptions of two papers, which anybody can clearly see if they
simply go to that URL, and select for interplanetary trips and
cardiovascular problems.

And note what columbiaaccidentinvestigation somehow manages to overlook
as he pats himself on the back for catching me in a misquotation which
is, in fact, entirely of his own invention; these studies are wrt
prolonged exposure to hypogravity. And the scenario at hand has no such
exposure.

In fact, ALL the studies columbiaaccidentinvestigation has advanced to date
have significant mismatches with the scenario under discussion, which mean
they don't actually show a problem with the scenario under discussion.
I've pointed out these differences one by one; columbiaaccidentinvestigation
in turn has ignored them one by one, and then gone back and ignored these
differences all a second and third time.

And somehow it seems this is supposed to show how perceptive he is,
and how dishonest I am. Um. Yeah, sure it does.


Wayne Throop http://sheol.org/throopw

Wayne declared: "To remind you of the scenario at hand, it is
long-duration continuous exposure to 1g centriptal acceleration at less
than 1rpm. There is no reason to suspect there would be circulatory
system problems at all, and every reason, and lots of evidence, that
there would not be. Which your cite #10 mentions indirectly, since they
are studying less-than-1g and raster-than-1rpm as a cost-cutting
measure, and they explicitly state that's what they are doing. I really
don't know how I could have been more clear about this, or how you came
to the strange conclusion that I didn't think this research was
important. "

First you must understand what adaptation means...
Oxford reference Concise Science dictionary, oxford university press
2nd ed 1991. page 12 col 1 par 5

Adaptation : Any change in the structure or functioning of an organism
to it's environment. The alteration in the degree of sensitivity
(either decrease or an increase) of a sense organ to suit conditions
more extreme than normally encountered.

Then you can start to understand the correlation that any living
organism will adapt to the changed environment, any that means large or
small radius 1g, spinning capsule on a interplanetary traveling
spacecraft.

*10
Space Settlements: A Design Study
Nasa SP-413 NASA 1977 page 179 col1 par 3
"8. Recommendations and Conclusions..
2. Maximum Acceptable Rate G Levels. The Physiological effects of
zero-g are serious for long duration-exposure in space. For this
reason and since little is known about the exposure at intermediate
g-levels, 1g was chosen as the design standard. The 1-g choice has
significant influence on the design and may be unnecessarily high. An
examination of physiology under partial g is required in spaelab, and
subsequent space station missions to determine the minimum g value, for
which there are no serious long-term physiological effects upon humans.
3. Maximum Acceptable rate of habitation rotation. The rate of
rotation required to achieved the desired pseudo gravity has
substantial impact on the design. Since the g-level and rate of
rotation determine colony dimensions to a large extent (and thus
weight) determination of an acceptable rate of rotation is important.
While it is difficult to test human vestibular functions in a realistic
way on earth it is critical that a better understanding of the subject
be obtained by both studies on earth and in space."

Once again wanye said"Which your cite #10 mentions indirectly?

That's the best you can do, indirectly mmmmm
Im glad you have arrived at your conclusions that there "is no reason
to suspect there would be circulatory system problems", but before
you continue you might want to read the information below, before you
disagree with the current scientific studies into human adaptation.
The studies into the effects of long term space travel are numerous and
very specific, as studies cited below from the Nasa Ames Perceptual and
Behavioral Adaptation Group.

http://pbagroup.arc.nasa.gov/publications2001-2002.php
"Publications from 2001-2002
Titles:
Effects of Gravitational and Optical Stimulation on the Perception of
Target Elevation
Readaptation of Rat Locomotor Activity and Deep Body Temperature
Circadian Rhythms Following Exposure to Chronic Hypergravity
Chronic Centrifugation (Hypergravity) Influences the Circadian System
of the Rat
Visual and Vestibular Determinants of Perceived Eye-level


Effects of Gravitational and Optical Stimulation on the Perception of
Target Elevation
Malcolm M. Cohen, Robert B. Welch, and Charles W. DeRoshia, Arnold E.
Stoper (CSU Hayward)
We examined the combined effects of gravitational and optical
stimulation on perceived target elevation by independently altering
gravitational-inertial force and both the orientation and structure of
a background visual array. Eighteen observers set a target to the
apparent horizon while experiencing 1.0, 1.5, or 2.0 Gz in the human
centrifuge at NASA-Ames Research Center. The target was viewed against
the far wall of a box that was pitched at various angles; the box was
brightly illuminated, had only its interior edges dimly illuminated, or
was kept dark. Target settings were lowered as Gz increased; this
effect was reduced when the box was illuminated. Also, target settings
were displaced in the direction the box was pitched when it was
visible. Results are attributed to the combined influence of
otolith-oculomotor mechanisms that underlie the elevator illusion and
visual-oculomotor mechanisms (optostatic responses) that underlie the
perceptual effects of viewing pitched visual arrays.
Perception and Psychophysics, 2001, 63(1): 29-35

Readaptation of Rat Locomotor Activity and Deep Body Temperature
Circadian Rhythms Following Exposure to Chronic Hypergravity
Objectives: This study was conducted to evaluate the adaptation
response of rat deep body temperature (DBT) and locomotor activity
(LMA) circadian rhythms to acute hypergravity onset and chronic
hypergravity exposure. Our study differs from previous reports (1,2) in
that we provide a comprehensive mathematical analysis to quantitate the
physiological adaptation of the circadian timing system to three
chronic hypergravity intensities (1.25, 1.5, and 2 G.) and also provide
a statistically quantitative evaluation of rhythmic readaptation and
stabilization durations for several circadian rhythm metrics.
Paper presented at The Future of Chronic Acceleration Meeting, Davis,
CA, January 30, 2001

Chronic Centrifugation (Hypergravity) Influences the Circadian System
of the Rat
Objectives: This study was conducted to quantitate the effect of
chronic centrifugation on animal energy expenditure, and to evaluate
the response of the DBT and LMA circadian oscillators (biological
clocks) to acute hypergravity onset and adaptation to chronic
hypergravity exposure. We report herein the analysis of the gross
animal locomotor activity (LMA) data (which was measured as an indirect
indicator of animal energy expenditure), and the deep body temperature
(DBT) data. Our study differs from previous reports on this topic
(2,3,6), in that we provide a comprehensive mathematical analysis to
quantitate the physiological adaptation of the circadian timing system
to three chronic hypergravity "doses" (1.25, 1.5 , and 2 G).
Paper presented at the Future of Chronic Acceleration Meeting in Davis,
CA, Jan 31, 2001

Visual and Vestibular Determinants of Perceived Eye-level
Malcolm M. Cohen
Both gravitational and optical sources of stimulation combine to
determine the perceived elevations of visual targets. The ways in which
these sources of stimulation combine with one another in operational
aeronautical environments are critical for pilots to make accurate
judgments of the relative altitudes of other aircraft and of their own
altitude relative to the terrain. In a recent study (Cohen, Stoper,
Welch, & DeRoshia, 2001), my colleagues and I required eighteen
observers to set visual targets at their apparent horizon while they
experienced various levels of Gz in the human centrifuge at NASA-Ames
Research Center. The targets were viewed in darkness and also against
specific background optical arrays that were oriented at various angles
with respect to the vertical; target settings were lowered as Gz was
increased; this effect was reduced when the background optical array
was visible. Also, target settings were displaced in the direction that
the background optical array was pitched. Our results were attributed
to the combined influences of otolith-oculomotor mechanisms that
underlie the elevator illusion and visual-oculomotor mechanisms
(optostatic responses) that underlie the perceptual effects of viewing
pitched optical arrays that comprise the background. This paper
presents a mathematical model that describes both the independent and
combined effects of Gz intensity and the orientation and structure of
background optical arrays; the model predicts quantitative deviations
from normal accurate perceptions of target localization under a variety
of conditions. Our earlier experimental results and the mathematical
model are described in detail, and the effects of viewing specific
optical arrays under various gravitational-inertial conditions
encountered in aeronautical environments are discussed.
Abstract of Poster presented to the NATO-RTO Conference on Spatial
Disorientation in Military Vehicles, La Coruña, Spain 15-17 April
2002"


*4
http://hacd.jsc.nasa.gov/
"Human Adaptation and Countermeasures Division (HACD)
The Human Adaptation and Countermeasures Division (HACD) is responsible
for the performance of biomedical research focused on: 1) understanding
the normal human response to space flight, and 2) developing, testing,
and delivering countermeasures to those untoward responses that may
affect crew health, safety, and/or performance during or after space
flight missions. The HACD is comprised of two branches.
Biomedical Research and Operations Laboratories Branch


Tom
"Maintaining optimal alertness and neurobehavioral functioning during
space operations is critical to enable the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration's (NASA's) vision and quota extend humanity's
reach to the Moon, Mars and beyond and quota to become a reality."
(Mallis, M. M.; DeRoshia, C. W)



Wayne Throop wrote:
: "columbiaaccidentinvestigation"
: As you can see dr cohens investigations "above" are if a negative
: effect of a 1g spun capsule is if human adaptation will occur to any
: change in environment ie, if the "strange effects" might become
: familiar to the space travelers and not allow them to return to a
: normal life on earth.

Exposure to small-radius spin and high accelerations.
None of which are relevant to the scenario at hand.

: This question is much more important than your or anybody elses ego in
: making safe and effective countermeasures for space travelers,

I never said it wasn't important, I said it was irrelevant to the
scenario at hand, and indeed it *is* irrelevant to the scenario at hand.
It is relevant to lots of *other* scenarios, just not the one at hand.

Similarly your cite #10; it's interesting and important research. Just
not relevant to the scenario at hand. Relevant to other scenarios. Not
the one at hand.

To remind you of the scenario at hand, it is long-duration continuous
exposure to 1g centriptal acceleration at less than 1rpm. There is no
reason to suspect there would be circulatory system problems at all,
and every reason, and lots of evidence, that there would not be.
Which your cite #10 mentions indirectly, since they are studying
less-than-1g and raster-than-1rpm as a cost-cutting measure,
and they explicitly state that's what they are doing.

I really don't know how I could have been more clear about this,
or how you came to the strange conclusion that I didn't think this
research was important.


Wayne Throop http://sheol.org/throopw

: "columbiaaccidentinvestigation"
: First you must understand what adaptation means...

And then (this being the part columbiaaccidentinvestigation consistently
gets wrong) you have to understand what you're adapting to.

: Then you can start to understand the correlation that any living
: organism will adapt to the changed environment,

And you will understand that aspects of the environment that don't
change, won't cause a change in adaptation. The aspect of the
environment involved in circulatory adaptatons (as the NASA cites
have made quite clear) is acceleration (refered to by way of "microgravity"
and "hypogravity"). And that aspect of the environment didn't change.
Since it didn't change, adaptation to a change wouldn't occur. Because,
you see, there wasn't a change.

Now, adaptations to things that *did* change would occur. But not to
the things that didn't ch ange. And the acceleration which, if changed,
would cause circulatory adaptations, did in fact not change.

It is *really* *really* difficult to see how this could be made clearer.
Yet, columbiaaccidentinvestigation manages to miss it every time.
A remarkable performance. And so I remark upon it.


Wayne Throop http://sheol.org/throopw

Wanye posted:"Serious cardiac dysrhythmias may occur due to prolonged
exposure to hypogravity or asymptomatic cardiac disease. And :
Diminished cardiac function, orthostatic or postural hypotension, and :
the impaired ability to perform strenuous tasks on a planetary surface
may occur due to prolonged exposure to hypogravity." And the actual
source *12 says the following: Since I wasn't refering to only "source
*12", but to two sources, the relevance of there being an addition from
another source difference is not apparent to any thinking person
(though I suppose it may be apparent to columbiaaccidentinvestigation).
Perhaps columbiaaccidentinvestigation would like to "correlate" his
quote of my quote, and discuss why he removed all the whitespace that
made it clear I was quoting two sources. Here is what I actually said,
with the whitespace and relevant context left intact"

Dude you don't understand you ego game of hide the source means
nothing, it a joke in the world of science and critical writing, "ie
I have the info and you must find it" is weaker than "my dog ate
it", so try again for the purpose to show you are not willing to take
credit for someone elses work (good science by good scientists), as you
seem to not care what it takes to try and prove me wrong, and that's
just a reflection of you, not me bud....
http://www.vestibular.org/vestibular...put.phpSensory
Input

The ability to maintain balance depends on information that the brain
receives from three different sources-the eyes, the muscles and
joints, and the vestibular organs in the inner ears. All three of these
sources send information in the form of nerve impulses from sensory
receptors, special nerve endings, to your brain.

Input from the eyes
Nerve endings or sensory receptors in the back of the eye (retina)
called rods and cones are sensitive to light. When light rays strike
them, their nerve fibers send impulses to the brain with visual cues
that aid in balance. For example, if a person is walking down the
street, buildings appear to be aligned straight up and down.

Input from the muscles and joints
The input received by the brain from the muscles and joints comes from
proprioception-sensory receptors that are sensitive to stretch or
pressure in the tissue that surrounds them. As the legs, arms, or other
parts of the body move, the receptors respond to the stretch of the
muscles surrounding them and send impulses through many sensory nerve
fibers to your brain.

Especially important are the impulses that come from your neck, which
indicate the direction the head is turned, and the impulses that come
from the ankles, which indicate the body's movement or sway relative to
the ground while standing.

Input from the vestibular system
The inner ear or labyrinth is a complex series of passageways and
chambers within the bony skull. Within these passageways are tubes and
sacs filled with a fluid called endolymph. Around the outside of the
tubes and sacs is a different fluid-the perilymph. Both of these
fluids are of precise chemical compositions, and they are different.
The mechanism in your inner ear that regulates the amount and
composition of these fluids is important to the proper functioning of
your inner ear.

Each inner ear has a hearing (auditory) component-the cochlea, and a
balance (vestibular) component-the vestibular apparatus, consisting
of three semicircular canals and a utricle and saccule. Each of the
semicircular canals is located in a different plane in space. They are
located at right angles to each other and to those on the opposite side
of the head. At the base of each canal is a swelling (ampulla) and
within these ampullae are located the sensory receptors for each canal.


Inside each fluid-filled semicircular canal is a sensory receptor
(cupula) attached at its base. With head movement in the direction in
which this canal is located, the endolymphatic fluid within the canal,
because of inertia, lags behind. When this fluid lags behind, the
sensory receptor within that canal is bent. The receptor then sends
impulses to the brain about movement.

When the vestibular apparatus on both sides of the head are functioning
properly, they send symmetrical impulses to the brain. That is, the
impulses coming from the right side conform to [agree with] the
impulses coming from the left side."

*4
http://hacd.jsc.nasa.gov/
"Human Adaptation and Countermeasures Division (HACD)
The Human Adaptation and Countermeasures Division (HACD) is responsible
for the performance of biomedical research focused on: 1) understanding
the normal human response to space flight, and 2) developing, testing,
and delivering countermeasures to those untoward responses that may
affect crew health, safety, and/or performance during or after space
flight missions. The HACD is comprised of two branches.
Biomedical Research and Operations Laboratories Branch


Tom
"Maintaining optimal alertness and neurobehavioral functioning during
space operations is critical to enable the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration's (NASA's) vision and quota extend humanity's
reach to the Moon, Mars and beyond and quota to become a reality."
(Mallis, M. M.; DeRoshia, C. W)

Wayne Throop wrote:
: ""
: Oh yeah notice the difference between waynes message and the actual source

Or better, notice that columbiaaccidentinvestigation is altering the
quotation, so it isn't actually my message. See below for details.

: (That's chunking

It is? Never heard the term used that way.
Is this a meaning of your own invention? Or is there some
community in which it is current usage?

: Wanye posted:"Serious cardiac dysrhythmias may occur due to prolonged
: exposure to hypogravity or asymptomatic cardiac disease. And
: Diminished cardiac function, orthostatic or postural hypotension, and
: the impaired ability to perform strenuous tasks on a planetary surface
: may occur due to prolonged exposure to hypogravity."
:
: And the actual source *12 says the following:

Since I wasn't refering to only "source *12", but to two sources, the
relevance of there being an addition from another source difference is
not apparent to any thinking person (though I suppose it may be apparent
to columbiaaccidentinvestigation). Perhaps columbiaaccidentinvestigation
would like to "correlate" his quote of my quote, and discuss why he
removed all the whitespace that made it clear I was quoting two sources.

Here is what I actually said, with the whitespace and
relevant context left intact

: http://bioastroroadmap.nasa.gov/index.jsp

[...] Selecting for interplanetary trips and
cardiovascular problems we find two papers, with these descriptions:

Serious cardiac dysrhythmias may occur due to prolonged exposure to
hypogravity or asymptomatic cardiac disease.

and

Diminished cardiac function, orthostatic or postural hypotension,
and the impaired ability to perform strenuous tasks on a planetary
surface may occur due to prolonged exposure to hypogravity.

Two descriptions of two papers, which anybody can clearly see if they
simply go to that URL, and select for interplanetary trips and
cardiovascular problems.

And note what columbiaaccidentinvestigation somehow manages to overlook
as he pats himself on the back for catching me in a misquotation which
is, in fact, entirely of his own invention; these studies are wrt
prolonged exposure to hypogravity. And the scenario at hand has no such
exposure.

In fact, ALL the studies columbiaaccidentinvestigation has advanced to date
have significant mismatches with the scenario under discussion, which mean
they don't actually show a problem with the scenario under discussion.
I've pointed out these differences one by one; columbiaaccidentinvestigation
in turn has ignored them one by one, and then gone back and ignored these
differences all a second and third time.

And somehow it seems this is supposed to show how perceptive he is,
and how dishonest I am. Um. Yeah, sure it does.


Wayne Throop http://sheol.org/throopw

On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 01:03:11 GMT, in a place far, far away,
(Wayne Throop) made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:

: "columbiaaccidentinvestigation"
: Dude you don't understand you ego

Really? I don't? Well, that seems less crippling than
not understanding simple english sentences, which seem to be your problem.

Wayne, why do you continue to respond to someone who is obviously
mentally ill? I'll quit if you will. No one else is feeding this
troll.

: "columbiaaccidentinvestigation"
: Dude you don't understand you ego

Really? I don't? Well, that seems less crippling than
not understanding simple english sentences, which seem to be your problem.

: game of hide the source

Yeah, I "hid the source" by providing a url to it. Sure, that makes sense.

: The ability to maintain balance depends on information that the brain
: receives from three different sources-the eyes, the muscles and
: joints, and the vestibular organs in the inner ears. All three of
: these sources send information in the form of nerve impulses from
: sensory receptors, special nerve endings, to your brain.

Gee, you say that almost as if it were relevant.

Yes, the human inner ear can detect spin.
Now, do you have any sources that say what happens when
that spin is less than 1rpm? What adaptations occur, if any?
No? Why am I not surprised?


Wayne Throop http://sheol.org/throopw